Its gotten a lot of comments from many perspectives but I think the underlying problems of hunting actively deteriorating the ecology, whilst being a danger to NP users (let alone animal welfare arguments) end up being very straightforward and convincing.
The appalling nature of the political back room dealing, where a tiny dogmatic minority dictates policy (to allow the passage of equally bad policy) leaves much to be desired.

that link was just propaganda by oferral and even contains the real reason why it was done when he said>"the Government had decided to expand the culling program to allow smooth passage of legislation to sell the State’s power generators"

>“Farmers do it tough enough without also having feral animals destroying their crops and livestock.>“This will also help prevent feral animals from displacing native species through predation and competition, and from devastating threatened vegetation by grazing and trampling.”

goin on an on about farmers doing it tough? why dont they shoot the ferals in the farmlands, an why arnt feral horses and lost stock in alpine parks included if they really serious?

>goin on an on about farmers doing it tough? why dont they shoot the ferals>in the farmlands, an why arnt feral horses and lost stock in alpine parks>included if they really serious?>>its not a voice of reason its just polly talk.>

Hunting in NSW national parks has not been delayed indefinitely, Premier Barry O'Farrell says.Source: AAP

A PROGRAM to allow hunting in NSW national parks has not been delayed indefinitely, Premier Barry O'Farrell says.

The NSW government has pushed back the start of the program while it continues consultations over its implementation, Mr O'Farrell says.

"No it hasn't been delayed indefinitely," he told ABC radio on Wednesday.

"I think it will be April (when it begins), but I'm happy to get to that detail and get back."

Mr O'Farrell said the government was continuing to talk to staff from NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service and consult with authorities in South Australia and Victoria where similar programs were in place.

"Consultations are still going on with NPWS staff," he said.

"We have actually been doing precisely what we should have been doing."

Environment Minister Robyn Parker is expected to announce the program's funding over five years on Wednesday, Fairfax reports, with the scheme set to cost taxpayers at least an extra $19 million.

The plan is part of a deal with the Shooters and Fishers Party, which saw the government pass legislation to allow recreational hunters to cull feral animals in the state's 79 national parks.

The controversial move has raised concerns that visitors to parks risk being accidentally shot by hunters.

Greens environment spokeswoman Cate Faehrmann said no amount of money would make amateur shooting in parks safe.

"The premier knows there is going to be a huge risk to public safety when national parks are opened up to shooters," she said in a statement on Wednesday.

"Now he is throwing money at the problem in a vain attempt to mitigate the risks.

"But what he should be doing is ripping up the deal and ending this embarrassing saga."

She said the $19 million that will reportedly go towards the scheme would be better spent on the National Parks and Wildlife Service.

"This money should be going towards properly resourcing our national parks to address the very real threats of weeds and feral animals instead of being wasted on this disgraceful deal," she said.

On 20/02/2013 Fizz wrote:>On 20/02/2013 technogeekery wrote:>>>it seems that the desire not to>>have amateurs with guns in National Parks might cross a few political>/>>ideological lines.>>What part of, this has been happening in Victorian National Parks for>years, do you not understand?

Fizz - no problem with my comprehension skills. Not sure if you noticed the title of this thread, we are talking about the possibility of shooting in NSW National Parks.

For clarity, I also understand that currently shooting is allowed in NSW State Forests. That also is another discussion.

On 20/02/2013 billk wrote:>>Paywall protected.>>Any subscribers like to cut and paste the story?
Wasn't aware that I have a subscription to the Online Oz? Maybe I erased it from my memory out of shame?

I had heard that currently most culling in NP's is done with trained professionals using choppers. Seems like a much better way of doing it than letting a bunch of amateurs (who may be licensed but have never used a firearm) tear things up.

Helicopter culling if that is what is the current means of control isn't working . What is the annual expenditure on this? There are idiots who are licenced shooters and there are many very responsible shooters .
It seems to me that accusing all shooters of being not suitable is like saying that all moterbike riders are drug taking , drug pushing standover , bikie gang members . Some are but the majority are not .
you certainly would want open slather but organised shooting does work .

Sorry Technog, didn't realize NSW NATIONAL Parks where some how more special than Victorian.
Where does this idea come from that it's going to be open slather for a bunch of beer swilling bogans in a ute with a spot light to go out and rain destruction on the environment?
What is being instigated is controlled cull of feral animals, similar to the practice which has removed 4000 feral goats from the Murray-Sunset NP.
To be able to take part in such shoots, of which there are only 23 people that participate in the above mentioned example. Shooters must pass an accreditation program consisting of map reading, navigation, firearm safety, wildlife appreciation, 4WD and ‘living-in-the-field’ courses. They must also pass map proficiency and shooting accuracy tests. I would like to see someone pass a shooting accuracy test who has never fired a rifle.
If you actually take the time to read the NSW government media release it mentions that they have investigated the Vic and SA programmes to set up a similar system.

On 18/02/2013 egosan wrote:>>What a ridiculous moral panic. I love the over the top picture. I am>surprised they didn't give the hunter a beard and a turban.

I agree egosan. There are some people arguing on this forum that took an anti-gun stance by default and are never going to change their minds, regardless of the arguments presented. The information in the last post from Fizz should dispel many of the fears the rational people in the debate had.

Stu did make a good point about how much effect amature hunters are going to have on feral populations. But as people have already highlighed, it is part of a coordinated approach including bating and professional hunters. As was recently demonstrated with the success of the fox bounty and the goat cull, thousands less feral animals at little cost to national parks is not going to hurt feral animal control efforts.

The politics behind how it transpired does leave a bad taste in the mouth though.

On 20/02/2013 Fizz wrote:>If you actually take the time to read the NSW government media release>it mentions that they have investigated the Vic and SA programmes to set>up a similar system.

You are naive if you believe this.
A. Because it is still under investigation, and there is nil obligation to implement it.
B. Because irrespective of the outcome, they will run their own race, but this is good propaganda in the meantime.

>>You are naive if you believe this.>A. Because it is still under investigation, and there is nil obligation>to implement it.>B. Because irrespective of the outcome, they will run their own race,>but this is good propaganda in the meantime.

And your evidence for this "informed" view is??
Or are you just gushing?

On 20/02/2013 Fizz wrote:>On 20/02/2013 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:>>>>>You are naive if you believe this.>>A. Because it is still under investigation, and there is nil obligation>>to implement it.>>B. Because irrespective of the outcome, they will run their own race,>>but this is good propaganda in the meantime.>>And your evidence for this "informed" view is??>Or are you just gushing?